From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@chelsio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: Drop WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag from core workqueues
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 10:04:02 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210412130402.GF227011@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210412124909.olui5hfhceakt4u4@beryllium.lan>
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:49:09PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> I've grepped through the code and didn't find anything which supports
> the guarantee claim. Neither mm nor schedule seems to care about this
> flag nor workqueue.c (except the early init bits). Or I must miss
> something.
It is pretty complicated, but the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM preallocates a thread:
static int init_rescuer(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
{
if (!(wq->flags & WQ_MEM_RECLAIM))
return 0;
rescuer = alloc_worker(NUMA_NO_NODE);
This comment explains it:
* Workqueue rescuer thread function. There's one rescuer for each
* workqueue which has WQ_MEM_RECLAIM set.
*
* Regular work processing on a pool may block trying to create a new
* worker which uses GFP_KERNEL allocation which has slight chance of
* developing into deadlock if some works currently on the same queue
* need to be processed to satisfy the GFP_KERNEL allocation. This is
* the problem rescuer solves.
*
* When such condition is possible, the pool summons rescuers of all
* workqueues which have works queued on the pool and let them process
* those works so that forward progress can be guaranteed.
*
* This should happen rarely.
Basically the allocation of importance in the workqueue is assigning a
worker, so pre-allocating a worker ensures the work can continue to
progress without becoming dependent on allocations.
This is why work under the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM cannot recurse back into the
allocator as it would get a rescurer thread stuck at a point when all
other threads are already stuck.
To remove WQ_MEM_RECLAIM you have to make assertions about the calling
contexts and blocking contexts of the workqueue, not what the work
itself is doing.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-12 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-12 12:23 [PATCH] nvme: Drop WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag from core workqueues Daniel Wagner
2021-04-12 12:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-12 12:49 ` Daniel Wagner
2021-04-12 13:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2021-04-13 8:54 ` Daniel Wagner
2021-04-13 13:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210412130402.GF227011@ziepe.ca \
--to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=bharat@chelsio.com \
--cc=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=swise@opengridcomputing.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).